About your Search

20121112
20121120
Search Results 0 to 11 of about 12 (some duplicates have been removed)
former california governor ronald reagan announced his third bid for the presidency and for the republican nomination and, of course, that one was successful. >>> the scandal continues to grow around david tpetraeus as his successor general john allen is now linked to the controversy or at least linked to some of the players. let's bring in our panel, political director for the grio.com, and columnist with bloomberg view, and stephanie is the president of emily's list and i also have james from the national journal who is out with a brand-new piece on this entire episode. so, james, i want to start with you because i thought this was a very striking -- you sort of write about -- trying to write about this from 30,000 feet, the impact on national security. this is what you write, no one is condoning what petraeus did, but there are a lot of self-righteous people holding him to a standard that not many people could meet without considering what he sacrificed because of the years of separation from his spouse and family, said one army general. there's a lack of proporti
of the major puzzles and challenges for the republican party now as it was a generation ago. ronald reagan in part with the help of jack kemp, a generation ago, found a way to sell supply side economics as a blue collar alternative. to sell it to the common man. that's what reagan and kemp were all about. the republicans lost the ability to do that. they lost the argument once. they're going to have to figure out how to make that argument again because if they're going to say that unleashing the power of the free market is the route forward for the middle class and the working people of america, they need convincing arguments and convincing people to do it. mitt romney, if you look at it from even the slightest distance, was arguably the worst possible carrier of that message. they need somebody else. they need to southern populism or populism from somewhere, but they also need the proof. they need the evidence. and lacking the evidence last time in the election of a week ago, a week or two ago, people went with the -- what they knew, which was the president's belief in the power of govern
in washington at the ronald reagan building. so i'm leaving. you'll wrap things up for us. >> i'll hold down the fort, but only while you're gone. >> you'll do an excellent job. we'll have much more of what's going on, including my interview with senator dianne feinstein. she's got a lot to say on this whole scandal. and it sounds to her like it's something out of the national enquirer. something very interesn common. they have teachers... ...with a deeper knowledge of their subjects. as a result, their students achieve at a higher level. let's develop more stars in education. let's invest in our teachers... ...so they can inspire our students. let's solve this. online outfit piccolo headphones buy now broadway show megapixels place to sleep little roadster war and peace deep sea diving ninja app hipster glasses 5% cash back sign up to get 5% everywhere online through december. only from discover. >>> the affair that brought down cia director david petraeus caught most officials in the nation's capital by surprise. and many of us by surprise. and they're finding general john allen's connecti
. bill bradley and i started with the first bill on this, and then ronald reagan picked it up and really carried at, and we got it done in a bipartisan way. when we did our original bill, we took out a mortgage deduction, we took out the charitable deduction, we took out everything, and we got right down to christie, it was 10%, 50%, 25% was the top rate, and we thought it was an elegant bill, but it could not pass muster political. we had all the real estate people and all the mortgage bankers and everybody came to town and said you get rid of the mortgage interest deduction is the end of the world, so we lost that. and all the university presidents and all the priests and all the other charities came and said you cannot get rid of that. the only thing we call on to was state and local income tax, and how we hang -- hung on to that i would never know. in the end, we were able to lower individual rates by taking more money from the corporate side, which i do not think you can do now. everybody is saying that corporate rate is too high in america, said to be competitive we have to get at
been pro-immigration. ronald reagan was solidly for immigration reform, and if you go to youtube and google reagan-mondale debate, reagan making the case not for legalization, but for amnesty. using that word. now, republicans are pro-immigration, but they have been afraid for the past six years of anti-immigration lobby with an incredible political machine, and anybody who says anything constructive on immigration will be labeled pro-amnesty, and certainly, some talk show hosts, and now, i think this election cycle dramatically changed that. i can, at least, number half a dozen talk shows that said, you know what? my position evolved, and now i'm for immigration reform, but that is good because it will give cover to a lot of republicans who have avoided the issue or want to deal with the issue to actually do it so we have to reclaim the issue, and we can do it because immigration and being for immigration reform is actually the conservative position. restrictionists at the end is part of the nationalist, protectionist paradigm, and if we are the party of the family, if we ar
Search Results 0 to 11 of about 12 (some duplicates have been removed)

Terms of Use (10 Mar 2001)